T1055: Process Injection
Adversaries may inject code into processes in order to evade process-based defenses as well as possibly elevate privileges. Process injection is a method of executing arbitrary code in the address space of a separate live process. Running code in the context of another process may allow access to the process's memory, system/network resources, and possibly elevated privileges. Execution via process injection may also evade detection from security products since the execution is masked under a legitimate process.
There are many different ways to inject code into a process, many of which abuse legitimate functionalities. These implementations exist for every major OS but are typically platform specific.
More sophisticated samples may perform multiple process injections to segment modules and further evade detection, utilizing named pipes or other inter-process communication (IPC) mechanisms as a communication channel.
Analyst context for executives and security teams
Process Injection matters because malicious code can run inside a legitimate live process, making activity appear to come from trusted software rather than a separate suspicious program. For leaders, the issue is not just malware execution; it is whether endpoint, identity, and incident response teams can distinguish normal process behavior from code running under another process context across Windows, Linux, and macOS.
Executive priority
Prioritize this technique as a resilience and detection-readiness concern for endpoint-heavy environments and systems where privileged processes are common. ATT&CK maps it to stealth and privilege escalation, and relationships show use in multiple campaigns, including activity involving critical infrastructure and network devices. Executives should ask whether privileged account controls, endpoint behavior prevention, and cross-platform telemetry are actually producing evidence that can support incident decisions and audit defensibility.
Technical view
SOC and IR teams should validate coverage against behavioral signs of code executing in the address space of another live process, not just process names or file reputation. The related ATT&CK detection strategy is DET0508, Behavioral Detection of Process Injection Across Platforms. Sub-technique context indicates Windows-heavy variants such as DLL injection, PE injection, APC injection, thread local storage, process hollowing, process doppelgänging, Extra Window Memory Injection, and ListPlanting, plus Linux variants using ptrace, /proc memory, and VDSO hijacking. Detection engineering should therefore test whether endpoint telemetry exposes process-to-process memory access, suspicious thread or callback behavior, anomalous module loading, suspended or modified process execution, IPC such as named pipes, and Linux process tracing or /proc memory interactions where applicable.
Likely telemetry
- Endpoint process creation and parent-child process lineage
- Process-to-process access and memory modification events
- Thread creation, callback, or execution context changes where collected
- Module or library load telemetry, including DLL/shared library activity
- Suspended process creation and process image or memory anomalies
Detection direction
- Do not rely only on process allowlists or executable reputation; the technique is specifically useful because execution may be masked under a legitimate process.
- Map analytics to the relevant operating systems in scope: Windows, Linux, and macOS are listed for the parent technique, while several supplied sub-techniques are platform-specific.
- Use DET0508 as the ATT&CK-linked detection strategy reference and validate whether local telemetry supports behavioral detection across platforms.
- Tune for legitimate administrative, debugging, security, and software instrumentation tools that may resemble injection behavior to reduce false positives without suppressing high-risk privileged-process cases.
- Correlate suspected injection with privilege changes, unusual IPC, unexpected network activity from trusted processes, and affected process integrity where telemetry exists.
Mitigation priorities
- Start with M1026 Privileged Account Management: reduce unnecessary administrative, SYSTEM, or root-level exposure so injected code is less likely to inherit broad privileges.
- Implement M1040 Behavior Prevention on Endpoint to detect or block suspicious process, file, API, and endpoint behavior rather than depending only on signatures.
- Validate controls separately for Windows, Linux, and macOS because ATT&CK notes implementations are platform-specific.
- Ensure privileged account activity is logged and auditable so IR teams can determine whether injected execution gained elevated access.
- Use detection tests and incident response exercises to confirm that alerts include enough process, memory, user, and host context for containment decisions.
Analyst notes and limits
The object has no official ATT&CK detection text, so this take relies on the official description, platforms, tactics, DET0508 detection-strategy relationship, M1026/M1040 mitigation relationships, and supplied sub-technique relationships. Campaign and group relationships indicate this behavior appears in ATT&CK reporting across multiple intrusion contexts, but they do not by themselves prove current exposure in any specific environment.
Local conclusions require environment-specific evidence: operating systems in use, EDR or endpoint logging depth, privileged account design, and whether process memory, thread, module-load, IPC, ptrace, and /proc telemetry are collected. This summary does not assert active exploitation, specific actor targeting, or guaranteed detection coverage.
Process Injection
Adversaries may inject code into processes in order to evade process-based defenses as well as possibly elevate privileges. Process injection is a method of executing arbitrary code in the address space of a separate live process. Running code in the context of another process may allow access to the process's memory, system/network resources, and possibly elevated privileges. Execution via process injection may also evade detection from security products since the execution is masked under a legitimate process.
There are many different ways to inject code into a process, many of which abuse legitimate functionalities. These implementations exist for every major OS but are typically platform specific.
More sophisticated samples may perform multiple process injections to segment modules and further evade detection, utilizing named pipes or other inter-process communication (IPC) mechanisms as a communication channel.
How security teams should use this page
Treat this object as behavior context, not an attribution claim. Validate the related groups, software, data sources, and mitigations against official ATT&CK relationships and your own telemetry before making control-coverage decisions.
Related techniques
This mirrors the MITRE pattern of making group, software, campaign, and technique relationships scannable. Relationship notes come from mirrored ATT&CK relationship text when available.
| Domain | ID | Name | Relationship / procedure |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enterprise | T1055.013 | Process Doppelgänging Sub-technique | Process Doppelgänging subtechnique of this object. |
| Enterprise | T1055.012 | Process Hollowing Sub-technique | Process Hollowing subtechnique of this object. |
| Enterprise | T1055.009 | Proc Memory Sub-technique | Proc Memory subtechnique of this object. |
| Enterprise | T1055.015 | ListPlanting Sub-technique | ListPlanting subtechnique of this object. |
| Enterprise | T1055.014 | VDSO Hijacking Sub-technique | VDSO Hijacking subtechnique of this object. |
| Enterprise | T1055.005 | Thread Local Storage Sub-technique | Thread Local Storage subtechnique of this object. |
| Enterprise | T1055.011 | Extra Window Memory Injection Sub-technique | Extra Window Memory Injection subtechnique of this object. |
| Enterprise | T1055.001 | Dynamic-link Library Injection Sub-technique | Dynamic-link Library Injection subtechnique of this object. |
| Enterprise | T1055.003 | Thread Execution Hijacking Sub-technique | Thread Execution Hijacking subtechnique of this object. |
| Enterprise | T1055.008 | Ptrace System Calls Sub-technique | Ptrace System Calls subtechnique of this object. |
Groups, software, and campaigns
G0082: APT38
APT38 is a North Korean state-sponsored threat group that specializes in financial cyber operations; it has been attributed to the Reconnaissance General Bureau.[1] Active since at least 2014, APT38 has targeted banks, financial institutions, casinos, cryptocurrency exchanges, SWIFT system endpoints, and ATMs in at least 38 countries worldwide. Significant operations include the 2016 Bank of Bangladesh heist, during which APT38 stole $81 million, as well as attacks against Bancomext [2] and Banco de Chile [2]; some of their attacks have been destructive.[1][2][3][4]
North Korean group definitions are known to have significant overlap, and some security researchers report all North Korean state-sponsored cyber activity under the name Lazarus Group instead of tracking clusters or subgroups.
G0091: Silence
Silence is a financially motivated threat actor targeting financial institutions in different countries. The group was first seen in June 2016. Their main targets reside in Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Poland and Kazakhstan. They compromised various banking systems, including the Russian Central Bank's Automated Workstation Client, ATMs, and card processing.[1][2]
G0050: APT32
APT32 is a suspected Vietnam-based threat group that has been active since at least 2014. The group has targeted multiple private sector industries as well as foreign governments, dissidents, and journalists with a strong focus on Southeast Asian countries like Vietnam, the Philippines, Laos, and Cambodia. They have extensively used strategic web compromises to compromise victims.[1][2][3]
G0102: Wizard Spider
Wizard Spider is a Russia-based financially motivated threat group originally known for the creation and deployment of TrickBot since at least 2016. Wizard Spider possesses a diverse arsenal of tools and has conducted ransomware campaigns against a variety of organizations, ranging from major corporations to hospitals.[1][2][3]
G1018: TA2541
TA2541 is a cybercriminal group that has been targeting the aviation, aerospace, transportation, manufacturing, and defense industries since at least 2017. TA2541 campaigns are typically high volume and involve the use of commodity remote access tools obfuscated by crypters and themes related to aviation, transportation, and travel.[1][2]
G0080: Cobalt Group
Cobalt Group is a financially motivated threat group that has primarily targeted financial institutions since at least 2016. The group has conducted intrusions to steal money via targeting ATM systems, card processing, payment systems and SWIFT systems. Cobalt Group has mainly targeted banks in Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia. One of the alleged leaders was arrested in Spain in early 2018, but the group still appears to be active. The group has been known to target organizations in order to use their access to then compromise additional victims.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7] Reporting indicates there may be links between Cobalt Group and both the malware Carbanak and the group Carbanak.[8]
G0067: APT37
APT37 is a North Korean state-sponsored cyber espionage group that has been active since at least 2012. The group has targeted victims primarily in South Korea, but also in Japan, Vietnam, Russia, Nepal, China, India, Romania, Kuwait, and other parts of the Middle East. APT37 has also been linked to the following campaigns between 2016-2018: Operation Daybreak, Operation Erebus, Golden Time, Evil New Year, Are you Happy?, FreeMilk, North Korean Human Rights, and Evil New Year 2018.[1][2][3]
North Korean group definitions are known to have significant overlap, and some security researchers report all North Korean state-sponsored cyber activity under the name Lazarus Group instead of tracking clusters or subgroups.
G1047: Velvet Ant
Velvet Ant is a threat actor operating since at least 2021. Velvet Ant is associated with complex persistence mechanisms, the targeting of network devices and appliances during operations, and the use of zero day exploits.[1][2]
G0094: Kimsuky
Kimsuky is a Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK)-based cyber espionage group that has been active since at least 2012. The group initially targeted South Korean government agencies, think tanks, and subject-matter experts in various fields. Its operations expanded to include the United Nations and organizations in the government, education, business services, and manufacturing sectors across the United States, Japan, Russia, and Europe. Kimsuky has focused collection on foreign policy and national security issues tied to the Korean Peninsula, nuclear policy, and sanctions. Kimsuky operations have overlapped with those of other North Korean state-sponsored cyber espionage actors as a result of ad hoc collaborations or other limited resource sharing.[1][2][3][4][5][6]
Kimsuky was assessed to be responsible for the 2014 Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Co. compromise; other notable campaigns include Operation STOLEN PENCIL (2018), Operation Kabar Cobra (2019), and Operation Smoke Screen (2019).[7][8][9] In 2023, Kimsuky was observed using commercial large language models (LLMs) to assist with vulnerability research, scripting, social engineering and reconnaissance.[10]
DPRK threat actor cluster boundaries overlap in open source reporting, with some security researchers consolidating all attributed North Korean state-sponsored cyber activity under Lazarus Group, rather than tracking operationally distinct subgroups.
G1023: APT5
APT5 is a China-based espionage actor that has been active since at least 2007 primarily targeting the telecommunications, aerospace, and defense industries throughout the U.S., Europe, and Asia. APT5 has displayed advanced tradecraft and significant interest in compromising networking devices and their underlying software including through the use of zero-day exploits.[1][2][3][4][5][6]
G0068: PLATINUM
S9025: NOOPLDR
NOOPLDR is a shellcode loader with XML/C# and DLL versions that has been used by MirrorFace to load HiddenFace.[1]
S0331: Agent Tesla
Agent Tesla is a spyware Trojan written for the .NET framework that has been observed since at least 2014.[1][2][3]
S0681: Lizar
S0533: SLOTHFULMEDIA
SLOTHFULMEDIA is a remote access Trojan written in C++ that has been used by an unidentified "sophisticated cyber actor" since at least January 2017.[1][2] It has been used to target government organizations, defense contractors, universities, and energy companies in Russia, India, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Malaysia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe.[3][4]
In October 2020, Kaspersky Labs assessed SLOTHFULMEDIA is part of an activity cluster it refers to as "IAmTheKing".[4] ESET also noted code similarity between SLOTHFULMEDIA and droppers used by a group it refers to as "PowerPool".[5]
S0581: IronNetInjector
IronNetInjector is a Turla toolchain that utilizes scripts from the open-source IronPython implementation of Python with a .NET injector to drop one or more payloads including ComRAT.[1]
S1159: DUSTTRAP
S1081: BADHATCH
S0398: HyperBro
HyperBro is a custom in-memory backdoor used by Threat Group-3390.[1][2][3]
S0633: Sliver
S0534: Bazar
Bazar is a downloader and backdoor that has been used since at least April 2020, with infections primarily against professional services, healthcare, manufacturing, IT, logistics and travel companies across the US and Europe. Bazar reportedly has ties to TrickBot campaigns and can be used to deploy additional malware, including ransomware, and to steal sensitive data.[1]
S0436: TSCookie
S0496: REvil
REvil is a ransomware family that has been linked to the GOLD SOUTHFIELD group and operated as ransomware-as-a-service (RaaS) since at least April 2019. REvil, which as been used against organizations in the manufacturing, transportation, and electric sectors, is highly configurable and shares code similarities with the GandCrab RaaS.[1][2][3]
C0029: Cutting Edge
Cutting Edge was a campaign conducted by suspected China-nexus espionage actors, variously identified as UNC5221/UTA0178 and UNC5325, that began as early as December 2023 with the exploitation of zero-day vulnerabilities in Ivanti Connect Secure (previously Pulse Secure) VPN appliances. Cutting Edge targeted the U.S. defense industrial base and multiple sectors globally including telecommunications, financial, aerospace, and technology. Cutting Edge featured the use of defense evasion and living-off-the-land (LoTL) techniques along with the deployment of web shells and other custom malware.[1][2][3][4][5]
C0014: Operation Wocao
Operation Wocao was a cyber espionage campaign that targeted organizations around the world, including in Brazil, China, France, Germany, Italy, Mexico, Portugal, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The suspected China-based actors compromised government organizations and managed service providers, as well as aviation, construction, energy, finance, health care, insurance, offshore engineering, software development, and transportation companies.[1]
Security researchers assessed the Operation Wocao actors used similar TTPs and tools as APT20, suggesting a possible overlap. Operation Wocao was named after an observed command line entry by one of the threat actors, possibly out of frustration from losing webshell access.[1]
C0013: Operation Sharpshooter
Operation Sharpshooter was a global cyber espionage campaign that targeted nuclear, defense, government, energy, and financial companies, with many located in Germany, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Security researchers noted the campaign shared many similarities with previous Lazarus Group operations, including fake job recruitment lures and shared malware code.[1][2][3]
C0056: RedPenguin
The RedPenguin project was launched by Juniper in July 2024 to investigate reported malware infections of Juniper MX Series routers. RedPenguin activity was separately attributed to UNC3886 and included the deployment of multiple custom versions of the publicly-available TINYSHELL backdoor on Juniper routers.[1][2]
C0057: 3CX Supply Chain Attack
The 3CX Supply Chain Attack was the first publicly reported case of one supply chain compromise triggering another, leading to a cascading, two-stage intrusion. The initial supply chain attack began when a 3CX employee downloaded and executed a trojanized, end-of-life version of the X_Trader trading software from Trading Technologies. This provided UNC4736, a threat cluster associated with AppleJeus, access to the 3CX environment. From there UNC4736 compromised the Windows and macOS build environments used to distribute the 3CX desktop application to their customers.[1] While 3CX serves more than 600,000 customers and 12 million users, only a subset of systems were affected. Subsequent targeting focused on victims in the defense and cryptocurrency sectors, where attackers deployed secondary payloads such as Gopuram for credential theft and persistence.[2] The campaign began in late 2022 and was disrupted after security vendors publicly reported the compromise in March 2023.[3][4]
All related ATT&CK context
Mitigation direction
Object version and sync metadata
The fields below describe the current mirrored snapshot. When Glexia retains multiple ATT&CK source imports, you can open the table to compare the same object across releases (hashes and MITRE timestamps). For MITRE’s own release notes and roadmap, see ATT&CK resources — Updates .
Imported snapshots across ATT&CK releases (1)
| Release | Bundle imported | Object version | Modified | Status | Raw hash |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19.1 | 2.0 | Current bundle | b52da42a36d5… |
Mirrored ATT&CK source object
The raw object is retained through the mirrored ATT&CK source bundle and object hash. The raw endpoint returns the exact object from the mirrored bundle when available.
External references and citations
MITRE external references are preserved separately from Glexia analysis so citations remain traceable to their original source records.
-
[1]
mitre-attack T1055Open source URL
Source: MITRE ATT&CK®. © 2026 The MITRE Corporation. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of The MITRE Corporation. MITRE ATT&CK and ATT&CK are registered trademarks of The MITRE Corporation. Glexia is not affiliated with or endorsed by MITRE.